On 9/20/22 05:23, David Hildenbrand wrote:
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wiEAH+ojSpAgx_Ep=NKPWHU8AdO3V56BXcCsU97oYJ1EA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wg40EAZofO16Eviaj7mfqDhZ2gVEbvfsMf6gYzspRjYvw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[2] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wit-DmhMfQErY29JSPjFgebx_Ld+pnerc4J2Ag990WwAA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
s/2/3/
...
diff --git a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
index 03eb53fd029a..e05899cbfd49 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
@@ -1186,6 +1186,67 @@ expression used. For instance:
#endif /* CONFIG_SOMETHING */
+22) Do not crash the kernel
+---------------------------
+
+In general, it is not the kernel developer's decision to crash the kernel.
What do you think of this alternate wording:
In general, the decision to crash the kernel belongs to the user, rather
than to the kernel developer.
I like the wording, it feels familiar somehow! :)
Reviewed-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx>